@The_Nybbler's banner p

The_Nybbler

If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.

8 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 21:42:16 UTC

				

User ID: 174

The_Nybbler

If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.

8 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 21:42:16 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 174

ATC and pilots are two different things. ATC was definitely held back by DEI considerations. Pilots are mostly not government employees. But the FAA's mandate is to keep the flying buses -- airliners -- safe. And they do, and part of that is discouraging use of the sky by anyone else. This suits commercial pilots fine; they hold private pilots in disdain. And it mostly suits private pilots who are "in the club" fine.

It's not that flying is particularly difficult or dangerous but rather that as the old quote goes "to an even greater degree than the sea, it is unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect."

Even that isn't credible. The pilot can die and an airplane can fly for hours before it crashes. The existence of Aeroflot and various third-world airlines demonstrates while you can certainly get yourself killed in the air, it's not nearly so unforgiving as that statement would indicate.

You may not like it, but there is a clear rationale to the FAA's rules.

Yes, to keep the sky an exclusive club. And to reduce the number of people the FAA has to ride herd on, and the amount of air traffic.

The 707 wasn't the first passenger plane; it wasn't even the first passenger jet. In 1932, an airshow performer named Harold Johnson was rolling a Ford Trimotor, a very early passenger plane.

If all the people who loudly claim some version of "literature industry is catering to men just fine, men are simply choosing other things" decided to partner with the people who claim "video game industry is catering to women just fine, women are simply choosing other things"

Problem: Despite having the same form, these statements have different truth values. Both the literature industry and the video games industry are trying to cater to women.

I agree with Opt-out here. It's easy to point fingers at woke or DEI, but I think the cause is really just prosaic capitalism.

No, it's not. We saw this during Floyd; woke is perfectly willing to leave money on the table (by canceling things catering to their enemies -- e.g. [I]Cops[/I] or [I]Roseanne[/I]) if they can prevent anyone else from picking it up. Capitalism or consumer preferences or whatever are then used as an excuse for this

It takes temendous skill and knowledge to even get a plane off the ground.

No it doesn't. Flying a plane is Nintendo-hard; the hard part isn't the actual flying but all the stuff built around it to make it more difficult to keep the number of pilots down. Learning arcane radio and airspace procedures, memorizing a few thousand checklists, reading 1950s telex-style aviation weather reports, etc. And dealing with the risk that if you get any of those arcane radio and airspace procedures wrong, you end up getting a number to call which connects you to an angry FAA guy who demands to know why he should let you keep your license, and there's only one attitude which works. And instructors, of course, who won't teach students who don't seem like they can display that attitude. Actually taking off... not that hard. I've heard twin-engine is actually harder... but I've heard it from the same people who swear flying a single-engine is hard when I know damn well a 9 year old tall enough to reach the controls can do it.

Doing a barrel roll with a passenger plane has likely never been done before

A fair number of old pilots did stuff like that when they knew their license was toast anyway. There's also FedEx 705, where the first officer inverted a DC-10 to foil a hijacking. As others mentioned, test pilot Tex Johnson rolled a prototype 707, twice.

ETA: Incidentally, Richard Russell himself never attended flight school and claimed he learned to fly from video games.

Your instinct is wrong. India has had a history of trans communities going back millennia. Chinese royal courts were chock full of castrated eunuchs. You're projecting an instinct acquired from the modern internet.

The presence of eunuchs isn't at all the same thing as "trans communities". They're not at all similar.

They happen to be the most recent decades, so I assume yes, but I don't know if the start coincided closely.

It's funny, all the YIMBYs want this or claim to, but when there's complaints about the cost of housing, it's always a single-family detached home used as the benchmark for complaining.

It appears about 3% of houses in the UK are second homes (not rented out).

They have a lot less power to stop inflation. (yeah, they can vote for the other guy. It generally doesn't work, and when it does they notice the prices are still high and punish the guy they voted in for that by bringing the previous bunch back).

A lot of people are genuinely too dumb or of poor impulse control to handle credit cards and banks quickly lock up all of their future disposable income. They would 100% have been better off without credit cards since they would simply be broke instead of six figures in debt.

They get a bunch of stuff, then they declare bankruptcy and never have to pay for it. This does ruin their credit, but because they're (by assumption) too dumb and/or have poor impulse control, they couldn't have taken advantage of good credit anyway.

Wage stickiness is a complication, but salaries still do go up and down. Instead of individual salaries going down, expensive individuals get laid off and/or juniors are hired at lower rates than previously. Though the general "solution" to wage stickiness has been inflation, and that's been around long enough to pass the fence.

Not a bad summary, but it misses that men have been taught for decades, explicitly, that receiving "hints" is not reason to believe a woman wishes to be approached. Stuff like "Just because she smiles at you doesn't mean she likes you".

(which, in worst case, would result in something like Hugo Chavez, not Lenin or Stalin, which would be indeed rather bad).

Uhh, Hugo Chavez would ALSO be rather bad.

Basically, you claim they're suicidal, but long-termist – their entire project is to last long enough to kill maximum Jews, ideally all Jews, on their way out?

They wish to destroy the State of Israel and the United States (the Little Satan and the Great Satan, as they put it), not necessarily kill maximum Jews.

Soccer is left-coded because it's Euro, and Europhilia is a left-coded thing. There have been many attempts to make US men's soccer happen, and none of them have really gotten anywhere, so soccer remains Euro.

FIFA is cuddly with Trump and Qatar because FIFA is utterly corrupt and therefore speaks Trump and Qatar's language.

Independent power or not, the fuel source has to come from somewhere, and these things have enormous power requirements; like, potentially more than your entire state currently generates.

They're industrial facilities. Yes, they use a lot of power. Though not more than "my entire state"; Google Lenoir, for instance, is estimated to have the capacity to use 133MW, compared to North Carolina's generating capacity of 36,000MW. This is about the same as a single line at an aluminum smelter. The Texas numbers you linked for are the total for 1800 separate projects.

Ah, the hot hot women with the cold cold eyes. I didn't realize that was Russian women in general rather than just the sort who associate with men to get access to their Goldman Sachs expense account.

Most notable thing about this story is the lack of anything from ICE or DHS, not even a "DHS refused to comment". Press isn't even trying any more.

Another strange thing: He wouldn't need asylum to stay in the US, he's a literally world-class soccer player and EB-1 visas from Argentina aren't oversubscribed. So why wouldn't he go that route?

How is Iran going to rebuild their manufacturing when we can bomb it whenever we want and they are running out of money?

We can bomb things, we can't bomb everything.

Cute, but California’s GDP is ~10x Iran’s. There are military bases in San Diego with more military capacity than Iran.

The US has made building things 1000x more difficult than it needs to be. A US with the military efficiency of WWII US and modern weaponry would spank today's US. So a much poorer Iran can do quite well.

War runs on economics, you actually can't continue fighting a war when your economic base runs out.

There's a lot of ruin in a nation of 90 million, and Iran seems quite capable of depleting it all. Their economic base will not run out fast enough.

resume killing officials until either the regime falls apart or whoever is on top has both the power and the will to make a deal they'll actually follow

This is currently America's strategy.

Which officials have been killed recently? The people we've been negotiating with don't seem to have changed in a while.

Hamas is not disarmed. Iran's leverage over the Straits is not discredited, though it is weakened. Iran's drone manufacturing industry will be up in a month; Iran's not California, they can rebuild and rebuild quickly.

Steak au poivre with strip loin is pretty good; that's how I typically do it. You can just grill up tenderloin (whether in the form of filet mignon or not) and it'll still be tender, but it doesn't have a lot of beefy taste. Note that if you have a porterhouse, one side of it is tenderloin.

The war is still going on. Iran obviously was pretty badly damaged, but the Iranian regime wins if the US gives up. If they toll the strait (with Oman's connivance or not), they win pretty big. If they just retain the HEU and keep the US from interfering in the future, they win; they'll start their nuclear program back up and nuke Tel Aviv if they can't restrain themselves... New York, D.C., Haifa, and Tel Aviv if they can hold out until they can get more bombs and some really long range ICBMs.

If they lose the HEU and the US gets to keep watching, they lose. If the regime falls, they obviously lose (the people of Iran will be materially best off in that case, though having bad leftist/modern Western values forced upon them is a danger). But Iran can still win this. I don't think they will -- the US demonstrating that commerce could be maintained (though degraded) regardless of their shooting at it took away their best card. But a big midterm Democratic win could see Trump forced to give up anyway.

Trump could also do something stupid like agree that Iran and Oman toll the strait in order to get a deal. He really likes deals.

Iran's economic situation almost doesn't matter. As long as they can keep the IRGC running, they can absorb a LOT of civilian hardship, and they've got 90 million civilians to feed into that fire. They have enough state capacity to keep the civilians from doing anything about it, too. Not giving a shit about your civilian population is a major advantage in the short term. So the US, to actually win, is going to have to do something -- either invade, or resume killing officials until either the regime falls apart or whoever is on top has both the power and the will to make a deal they'll actually follow. Trump can make as many deals as he wants with the people he's been negotiating with for months, they're going to break them all anyway. The previous MoA, though not a "US surrender" (because it had them turning over the HEU), was really good for Iran, but it wasn't good enough for them to follow. They're not getting better now unless Trump REALLY REALLY wants a deal.